INTRODUCTION “Within the interconnecting world of natural resources on the field of Africa soil, the power of corruption and the corruption of power are nowhere better explored among the world great powers and the African leaders’’ (Okpe 2014)

The root of African crisis transcend the era of independence in the 1960s. Though there existed pockets of conflicts between various ethnic nationalities in the pre-colonial Africa, the arrival of the world great power at the height of capitalism in Europe escalated conflicts that ravaged the continent till today. It all began with slave trade and then commodity trade which all placed Africa on a disadvantageous position.

The colonial and post-colonial activities of the major power blocks (the capitalist and socialist): Britain, Portugal, USSR, France to mention but a few has had a devastating effect on the less developed nations of Africa. The question boggling the mind of scholars of African descent is why has Africa had so many conflicts ranging from civil unrest, ethnic conflicts, rebel activities to full blown civil war while the developed countries of the world are at peace?

In all other regions of the world the incidence of conflicts especially civil war has been on a declining trend over the past thirty years but in Africa the long term trend has been upwards. Of course, the prevalence of conflicts in Africa cannot be unconnected with western economic interest and power politics in the continent.

The task of this paper is to unveil the role played by world great powers in facilitating conflicts in Africa. The paper is structured into five sections thus, Introduction, overview of conflicts in Africa, African conflicts and western arms industries, Multinational corporation and conflict in Africa and conclusion.

OVERVIEW OF CONFLICTS IN AFRICA Since the Berlin Conference during the late 1800s, the world great powers consisting of the western and the Eastern blocs carved up Africa and settled regions for themselves, these in some places were made possible with the help of some African traditional rulers.

African lands were divided among blocs, people who shares common historical background were separated based on these divisions. Own to the factors above, Africans began to live with themselves with suspicion. This seed of distrust among tribes and ethnic nationalities continued till the period of slave trade thereby aiding and abating slave trade.

The slave trade was followed by conquest of Africa by the colonial powers. As countries of Africa gained independence in the early 1960s, their political and economic powers were retained by their colonial master. The aim of colonialism was purely economical and so the departure of the colonial forces from African soil was never total.

In a bid to continue their exploitation of African economic resources, the colonial forces installed their stooges as leaders in Africa to enable them perpetuate the holding and controlling of Africa economic resources. (Sherman 2001)

The economic interest of the colonial powers caused many regime changes occasioned by military coups in the early years of independence in Africa. Abdoulaye (2004) observed that in the 1960-70s regime changes through military take-over occurred almost daily. With the exception of three countries, Kenya, Senegal and Cameroon, every country has had such a change.

In addition, countries that fought liberation wars in Southern Africa have somehow been mostly stable, with the exception of Angola that went through a devastating 13-year civil war. Armed conflicts became the phenomenon of the 1980s, just as the late 1960s and 1970s were marked by military coups sponsored by these world great powers.

It is a known fact that any African leader who failed to dance to the music of the world great power were ousted through coups. Most of the coups and counter coups witnessed in post independent Africa were a direct connivance between the coup plotters and these world great powers.

Analysts have blamed incessant conflicts in Africa on over population, legacy of western colonialization and power struggles;

‘’From Algeria to Zimbabwe, the continent of Africa has been embroiled in conflict for decades. The causes of the conflicts include overpopulation, the legacy of western colonialization and internecine power struggles. For many Africans, living with the terror and violence of continual war is the only life they have known’’. (Buchanan 2012).

So many countries in Africa have witnessed wars in different forms ranging from internal to external conflicts: Algeria, Burundi, Congo, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra-Leone, Eritrea/Ethiopia, Liberia etc are good case study here. As these civil wars gave way, rebel and militia groups, inter-tribal wars, ethnic conflicts and other civil disturbances took the centre stage.

Writing in 2001, BBC correspondent George Alagiah noted that since independence there have been over eighty violent or unconstitutional changes of government, and in twenty countries such eruptions have been a routine occurrences.

Indeed, over the years, African leaders have become synonymous with monstrous tyranny with the support of these great powers—Mobutu, Idi Amin, Abacha, Bokassa, Samuel Doe, Charles Taylor, Mugabe, Habre, Mengistu, Moi, Bashir. The list seems to be endless.

It is not possible to calculate the millions of people murdered by these men, or the amount of suffering they caused, or the amount of money stolen: Africans slaughtering Africans, Africans eviscerate other Africans, Africans brutally exploiting other Africans.

All of this, no doubt is a function of the world greatest power attempt to maintain political hegemony and exploitation of African economic resources. This is true because almost all the countries ravaged by conflicts are rich in one mineral resource other.

In contemporary time, the continent is overwhelmed with conflicts from Mali, to Egypt, Mali and Central African Republic. The world greatest power cannot be exonerated completely from these conflicts owning to the role they played and are actively playing in these conflicts ridden nations of Africa.

They world powers intervene in conflicts in Africa through the machineries of multinational companies jointly owned by the nationals of these great powers and some few African leaders and some time through direct intervention like in Mali, Egypt and their current attempt in the Boko-Haram insurgence in Nigeria.

As long as these kind of colonialist practices and human rights violations are allowed to continue-through the collusion of the multinationals and great powers of the world and corrupt African leaders turning a blind eye-it is going to be near impossible for the continent to find the peace the people so much desire.

AFRICAN CONFLICTS AND WESTERN ARMS INDUSTRIES

"We hope to build a new and lasting partnership between Africa and the world, based on common interests, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to peace, prosperity, and freedom." (Madeleine 1999).

The above quote would have convinced Africans of the seriousness of the West to end conflicts in Africa but the outcome of this research proves the contrary. The U.S. for instance has provided weapons and training to most of the perpetrators in the African conflicts.

A report by the United Nation showed that-in 1998 alone, U.S. weapons to Africa totaled $12.5 million, including substantial deliveries to Chad, Namibia, and Zimbabwe. On the rebel side, Uganda received nearly $1.5 million in weaponry over the past two years, and Rwanda was importing U.S. weapons as late as 1993 (one year before the brutal genocide erupted).

U.S. military transfers in the form of direct government-to-government weapons deliveries, commercial sales, and IMET training to the states directly involved has totaled more than $125 million since the end of the Cold War (Arms trade resource center)

Research has also shown that the U.S. helped build the arsenals of eight of the nine governments directly involved in the Congo War. In addition, some of the Rwandan forces which played a key role in toppling the regime of long-time arms client Mobutu Sese Soko in Zaire had received training from U.S. Special Forces under the Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) program.

The U.S. also provided an estimated $250 million in covert military assistance to UNITA’s forces between 1986-1991, and is alleged to be backing the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army. The table below explicitly testifies the western influence in African conflicts. (William 2001).

TABLE 1: Post-Cold War U.S. Arms Transfers to Governments Involved in the Congo War, 1989-1998 (in constant 1998 dollars) Up date to 2013

Country Foreign Military Sales Commercial Sales TOTAL Angola 0 31,000 31,000 Burundi 74,000 312,000 386,000 Chad 21,767,000 24,677,000 46,444,000 DRC 15,151,000 218,000 15,369,000 Namibia 2,311,000 1,934,000 4,245,000 Rwanda 324,000 0 324,000 Sudan 30,258,000 1,815,000 32,073,000 Uganda 1,517,000 9,903,000 11,420,000 Zimbabwe 567,000 828,000 1,395,000 TOTAL 71,969,000 39,718,000 111,687,000 Source: Arms Trade Resource Centre 2011

Post-Cold War International Military Education and Training (IMET) to Countries Involved in the Congo War, 1989-1998 (constant 1998 dollars)

Country IMET $ Value No. of STUDENTS Angola 177,000 5 Burundi 1,324,000 53 Chad 1,968,000 115 Congo 1,229,000 50 Namibia 1,589,000 111 Rwanda 1,425,000 66 Sudan 154,000 0 Uganda 3,856,000 154 Zimbabwe 2,661,000 176 TOTAL 14,383,000 730

Source: ARMS TRADE RESOURCE CENTER REPROT 2011

A country by country analysis of conflicts in Africa reveals enormous evidence that the developed nations of the world cannot exonerates themselves from the woes Africans are facing today. Bray (2003), argued that the gains these countries make from sales of arms either to the rebel groups or the government in the course of these conflicts within the continent is worth many countries budget in the continent.

MULTINATION CORPORATION AND CONFLICT IN AFRICA

This is all money, says a Western mining executive, his hand sweeping over a geological map toward the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). He is explaining why, in 1997, he and planeloads of other businessmen were flocking to the impoverished country and vying for the attention of then-rebel leader Laurent (Kabila. Dena & Frida 2001)

Most of the conflicts in Africa are found in areas where natural resources are present. Multi-national corporations play a particularly significant role in the continuation of these conflicts. Reports by the United Nations group of experts and several national and international NGOs have shown that natural resources were, and still are, fuelling conflict in Eastern DRC.

The United Nations has been reporting on the issue of the illegal exploitation of natural resources since 2002 and has created a specific group of experts on this issue. Rebel groups and members of the Congolese national army control the exploitation of gold, cassiterite, coltan, wolfram, timber and diamonds, in a number of areas in North and South Kivus.

They have become “informal owners” of pits, and they are levying taxes on minerals trade. In some territories in Eastern Congo, the informal artisanal mining sector generates hundreds of thousands of informal jobs and tens of millions of dollars per year. This is similar to what obtain in Niger Delta where armed oil bunkering by militia group has continued unabated.

The end of Second World War mark a water shade in the global trade as rapid globalisation of trade and investment drastically changed the nature of relations between states, and brought new actors to the fore in international affairs. Countries that were resistant to this trade throughout the developing world opened up their borders and welcomed an influx of goods, services and capital.

As a result, TNCs now reach into every corner of the globe, either directly through investment, or through supplier relationships with local firms. The largest of these corporations earn revenue in excess of that of many medium-sized countries, and their networks of partners and suppliers can number in the thousands. A further crucial factor has led to the emergence of the TNCs and Conflict nexus – and that is the changing nature of conflict itself.

A united Nation (UN) report in 2001 found that Rwandan, Ugandan and Burundian rebels looted and smuggled thousands of tons of coltan from the Congo into their countries to export to the global market, using the profits to finance their militias. Indeed, the official statistics provided by these countries' governments - which many human-rights observers believe hide large amounts of black-market trading - show that Uganda and Rwanda dramatically increased the export of coltan following their occupation of northeastern Congo.

For example, Uganda reported 2.5 tons of coltan exports a year before the conflict broke out in 1997. In 1999, the volume exploded to nearly 70 tons. Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi have issued protests to the United Nations over the report, claiming it to be inaccurate and unfounded. (Anup, 2010). A very simple and logical question to ask is who buy this coltan from these rebels at the international market?

According to Armstrong (2012), due to this illegal exploitation of these natural resources, people who live in this area are ready prey for secessionist political movements as is the case in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. To the usual romantic propaganda of identity politics, secessionist leaders can add the powerful language of economic self-interest: ‘our’ resources are being squandered by corrupt and alien elite. Large natural resource rents not only make civil war more likely, they make it more likely that a civil war will be secessionist. Biafra, Katanga, Cabinda: Africa’s secessionist wars have usually been related to natural resources. This easily becomes a breeding ground for developed nations of the world to align with them and plunder these natural resources.

The argument that natural resources increase the risk of conflict especially in Africa is substantiated by the fact that they provide an obvious source of finance for rebel groups. PEACE DIRECT a news magazine based in the DRC supported the claim thus:

“A major driver of the continued violence is minerals, namely coltan, diamonds, copper, cobalt and gold. Indeed, the cycle of violence that has enveloped the DR Congo since 1997 has presented opportunities for various armed groups, both state and non-state, to engage in the plunder of natural resources by creating and maintaining an environment of exploitation, instability and appalling inequality. In Eastern DR Congo, militia groups and the state fight for control and access to mines, flourishing in the instability it creates (Peace Direct 2012).

The proceeds from minerals are used by rebel leaders to purchase arms and pay recruits. Warfare is a costly business as Swanson (2002) opined that whereas thirty years ago rebel groups largely had to depend upon a friendly government for finance and armaments, now rebellion has been privatized-markets in natural resources and armaments have developed to the extent that rebel groups can be self-sufficient. Rebel groups gain access to natural resource rents in several ways. One is to run protection rackets against the companies or people who are the exporters (as in the case of Asari Dukobu in the Niger Delta who is being paid in millions to secure oil facilities).

Another is directly to operate extractive businesses. Yet another is to sell concessions to mineral rights in anticipation of subsequent control of the territory. The prolonged viability of UNITA in Angola and the RUF in Sierra Leone; the violent gangs of the Niger Delta; and the successful rebellions of Laurent Kabila in Zaire and of Denis Sassou-Nguesso in Congo Brazaville, were all assisted by one or the other of these methods of natural resource financing.

REBEL GROUPS IN AFRICAN CONFLICTS: HOW ARE THEY FUNDED?

Militancy and rebel groups have over the years, dominated public space in Africa: the Al-Shabbab, the Tuareg Rebels (Mali), the Lord’s Resistance Army (Uganda), the National Liberation Forces (Burundi), The West Side Boys (Sierra Leon), Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FLR), the Congolese Revolutionary Movement (DR Congo) the Somali Pirates, Boko Haram and The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (Nigeria) and many more. African leaders are so overwhelmed with the activities of the militants and rebel groups especially with the utilization of the very sophisticated weapons (RPG-7, ZPU, and many weapons that can take down planes (anti-aircraft missiles). These are weapons that cannot be manufactured in Nigeria, Somalia, DRC nor Uganda. The way and manner these militant and rebel groups receive support in form of weapons are no more a secret. (Berman2000)

During NATO’s war in Libya, France and Qatar under the eagle eyes of the United Nation (UN) delivered weapons in large quantities to the rebels whom the Western press often referred to as “activists” and “revolutionaries”. In addition to the weapons, the rebels also received communication equipment which facilitated and coordinated their movements across the continent smoothly.

In a recent conference held in the post-Gaddafi era that was attended by the leader of Libya’s ruling National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, admitted that Qatar sent hundreds of troops to support Libyan rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi. He described the Qataris as having planned the battles that paved the way for victory. (Patey 2006)

Since many of the rebels consider themselves to be “allies”, who are working for a common purpose, it wasn’t difficult for some of the weapons that were delivered to rebels in Libya to be quickly mobilized and smuggled to other rebel groups in the West African region. A recent report on Daily Trust news paper indicated that large amount of weapons from Libya have been found in Nigeria. Again, it is a common knowledge that the owner of Amigo super market located at Wuse II in Abuja is been held for stocking weapons in his super market. The end users of these weapons were the Boko Haram in Nigeria.

In fact, the nature of weapons that are currently in the rebel’s hands are too sophisticated and expensive that the cost may run into hundreds of millions of US dollars. In Nigeria, the current governor of Borno has publicly attested to this. Is it a wonder that these rebels were able to recently capture many towns and cities in the Central African Republic, where they ordered many government forces to surrender? Rebels in the Central African Republic, with a population of about five million, are notorious for unrest including coups, army mutinies and rebellions.

But how could the rebel fighters, many of whom are often wanted for prosecution get the wherewithal to buy those expensive weapons in such large quantities with impunity? No matter how rich the rebel leaders may be at any point, their continues ability to afford large cache of weaponry for such a very long period of time would be impossible to imagine, without any form of foreign sponsorship and the corporation of a few puppet politicians here in Africa.

What baffles many observers is the fact that western intelligence always have fore knowledge of most of the bomb attack by Boko Haram and other militia groups in Africa and usually warned their nationals to stay clear of such venues. But the question still remains: who supplies them with intelligence? Who provide these rebels with funding and logistics?

Do the rebels have the freedom to place such order for large quantities of weapons without any assistance from those in authority? The answer is not far fetched. After all it is well known that rebel leaders such as Charles Taylor was secretly funded and supported by certain Western countries, this rebel leader unleashed serious terror across the West African region for many years.

Therefore one should ask; why does the western intelligence always have prior knowledge before such bombs explode in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa? Is there anybody in the rebel groups that coordinates programs with foreign intelligence agencies? If that is the case, why can’t such information rather lead to the successful apprehensions of these militants instead of merely specifying targets they often select for such attacks? It is high time Africans begin finding answers to some of these questions.

CONCLUSION Africa today is synonymous with conflicts. The pockets of conflicts that existed in Africa before the arrival of the world greatest powers were escalated by the economic interest, and quest to exploit and maintain political denomination by these world greatest powers. African leaders who took over the reign of power from these colonial forces at independence did not help matters.

Their connivance with the world great power to plunder African economy also adds to the incidence of war and conflicts in the region of Africa. Natural resources that was hitherto supposed to be blessing to the region ended up becoming a curse as it becomes a cheap means of funding rebels and militias groups.

Until the world great powers are willing to serve the interests of long-term peace and stability, rather than short-term profit and politics, insecurity as is witnessed in Nigeria, civil unrest as in Mali, Central African Republic, DRC, Angola, and Sierra Leone, Eritrea and Ethiopia and other parts of Africa will continue unabated. Restricting arms flows to the region of Africa will require an unprecedented demonstration of sustained political will on the part of the regional and international leaders.

By shifting a mere fraction of the energy that currently goes to strengthen African militaries toward non-military alternatives that could promote democracy, development, and peace building. African leaders must embark on that path of change now, before the potential for positive engagement in the future is lost to the legacies of the past.

REFERENCES Abdoulaye, W.D. (2004): Overview of African Conflicts. The perspective, Atlanta

Georgia. Anup, S. (2010): Conflicts in Africa. The Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Global Issue: http://www.globalissues.org/articles/conflictsinafrica.

Armstrong, S. (2012): How Diamond Fuel Conflicts in Africa.

http://www.crimeofwar.com Arms Trade Centre Resources. http.//www.armstradecentre.com

Ballentine, K. and Heiko, N. (eds) (2005): Profiting from Peace: Managing the Resource Dimension of Civil War. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publications.

Banfield, J. et al. (2003): “Transnational Corporations in Conflict Prone Zones:

Public Policy Reponses and a Framework for Action.” London: International Alert. www.international-alert.org.

Bray, J. (2003): “Attracting Reputable Companies to Risky Environments: Petroleum and Mining Companies,” in Bannon, Ian and Paul Collier, Natural Resources and Violent Conflict: Options and Actions. Washington D.C.: World Bank. Ballentine,

Buchama, N. (2012): People Involved in African Conflicts. www.ehowcontribution.com

Berman, J. (2000): “Boardrooms and Bombs.” Harvard International Review, Vol.

22, Issue 3: 28-33. Dena, M & Frida, B. 2001): Dollars and Sense magazine

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Africa/Business_War_Congo.html)

Madeleine, A. (1999): UN Security Council Ministerial on Small Arms, New York

Patey, A. L. (2006): A Complex Reality: The Strategic Behaviour of Multinational

Oil Corporations and the New Wars in Sudan, DIIS Report, DIIS, March 2006www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/Reports2006/lpa_complex_reality_sudan.pdf.

Sherman, J. (2001): “Private Sector Actors in Zones of Conflict: Research Challenges and Policy Responses.” New York: FAFO Institute – International Peace Academy. www.ipacademy.org.

Swanson, P. (2002): “Fuelling Conflict: The Oil Industry and Armed Conflict.”

Economies of Conflict: Private Sector Activity in Armed Conflict. Fafo-report 378.Fafo.www.fafo.no.

UN Expert Panel Report (2001): http://www.un.org/News/dh/latest/drcongo.htm

William D. H. (2001): Deadly Legacy: U.S. Arms to Africa and the Congo War,

World Policy Institute, New York http://www.ehow.com/info_8249191_people-involved-african-conflicts.

By Okpe Emmanuel emmaokpe2003@yahoo.co.uk

Disclaimer: "The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cameroonweb. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). Cameroonweb will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article." © OKPE EMMANUEL.